Do We Have Any Bernie Sanders Supporters Among Us?

[Rob's House]

Local taxes were collected for the first public schools in the Colonies. When a community starts worrying about the collective well-being, individuals become inclined to sacrifice individual rights (income, in the vernacular of this conversation) for the betterment of the collective. When you think about it, I didn't print the money that constitutes my income, nor did I set up the system, nor did I insure it, nor did I just give it to myself. There is a great degree of interdependence involved that works to get the money to me. I don't get to decide the value of my own work and worth - the market decides.

 

Federal taxes have been collected since George Washington's Presidency - The Whiskey Tax. Whatever you think the Founding Fathers thought about taxes, doesn't jive with practice. In my opinion, Promoting individual rights over the collective well-being only causes disharmony, even on the interpersonal level, nevermind state vs. state. And there are bound to be rogue states and bully states in the absence of a strong central government. I believe that we have already tried the decentralized system of government that you are advocating, and it could have only continued to have been imposed at the point of a gun. The Confederacy is case in point, but it had been tried, and failed.

 

Each state would have its own immigration policy, customs, trade agreements. That's many massive bureaucracies that would be created, while losing the current efficiencies of scale that come with a strong central government. I just think that emphasizing individual rights is divisive. We'd be stepping on each others toes, and things could escalate quickly. United we stand; divided we fall.

 

Your ideas are kind of zany, though, and for that, I am grateful. Is it alright if I call you The Anarchist?

 

edit: minor grammatical

Hell of a straw man you got there, Franz. So according to your theory, you must either have a collectivist government that foregoes individual liberty in favor of "the greater good" (which was a hallmark of European socialists and fascists in the 30s; you see how that turned out), or the alternative is to disband the union?

[IDBillzFan]

I get the impression that some of the same voices that call for cutting food stamps, these same voices call for bombing Iran with their next breath. These armchair Alexanders don't realize the burden that American belligerence puts on the American taxpayer. These mini-Napoleons are marching us well beyond our line of supply, because they are glory hunters.

 

One of the big reasons fewer people want anything to do with the Democratic party is because of comments like this.

 

Only to divide. Never to unite. Only to shame. Never to lift up.

 

Fortunately, now that you're all desperately clinging to an avowed Socialist, it's easier to deal with you because more people see you for what you really are...complete nutbags.

[Who is Yuri?]

One of the big reasons fewer people want anything to do with the Democratic party is because of comments like this.

 

Only to divide. Never to unite. Only to shame. Never to lift up.

 

Fortunately, now that you're all desperately clinging to an avowed Socialist, it's easier to deal with you because more people see you for what you really are...complete nutbags.

Can you explain to me why every other of your posts ends with #feelthebern? Explain yourself, young man. At some odd level, I thought you we're one of us - the friends of Bernie who have united to make this thread strong. No more rabble rousing in Bernie's thread. We stand together. No more hair questions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/17/bernie-sanders-is-not-impressed-with-your-questions-about-hillary-clintons-hair/

[birdog1960]

Can you explain to me why every other of your posts ends with #feelthebern? Explain yourself, young man. At some odd level, I thought you we're one of us - the friends of Bernie who have united to make this thread strong. No more rabble rousing in Bernie's thread. We stand together. No more hair questions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/17/bernie-sanders-is-not-impressed-with-your-questions-about-hillary-clintons-hair/

what a great answer to a badly worded question. i like bernie more and more. i think he's a good man in the classical sense: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/. of course, that's irrelevant to many that you argue with here because they discount the value of the ancients' wisdom and of the concept of good in general.

Edited August 18, 2015 by birdog1960

[Magox]

Like I said earlier, the supporters of each party are drifting further and further out to the extremes. Hardly any of the boards liberals, may as well call them socialists now, don't care for Hillary (who could blame them?), but now support a candidate who believes that the federal tax rate should be at 90% for the wealthy, corporations should be owned by the workers rather than the ones who took the risks to start them, the federal minimum wage should be the same in Podunk Iowa as it is in New York City, an economy fueled by rainbow's and sunshine, supports partial term abortions and that we as a nation should remain in a pacifist/isolationist state no matter what happens to the rest of the world.

 

Bernie stands as much chance to win the elections as Trump, which is nil.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Magox

[Who is Yuri?]

To be clear, the 90% figure you quote isn't tax on income. It's the marginal tax rate under Ike in the 50's which Bernie's been quoted as admiring.

 

According to Google,

The marginal tax rate is the percentage of tax applied to your income for each tax bracket in which you qualify. In essence, the marginal tax rate is the percentage taken from your next dollar of taxable income above a pre-defined income threshold.

 

Income tax under Ike wasn't anywhere near 90% for the super-rich, and wouldn't be near 90 for Sanders. Marginal tax rate is the source of confusion.

[Magox]

To be clear, the 90% figure you quote isn't tax on income. It's the marginal tax rate under Ike in the 50's which Bernie's been quoted as admiring.

 

According to Google,

The marginal tax rate is the percentage of tax applied to your income for each tax bracket in which you qualify. In essence, the marginal tax rate is the percentage taken from your next dollar of taxable income above a pre-defined income threshold.

 

Income tax under Ike wasn't anywhere near 90% for the super-rich, and wouldn't be near 90 for Sanders. Marginal tax rate is the source of confusion.

 

 

It is on income.

[GG]

To be clear, the 90% figure you quote isn't tax on income. It's the marginal tax rate under Ike in the 50's which Bernie's been quoted as admiring.

 

According to Google,

The marginal tax rate is the percentage of tax applied to your income for each tax bracket in which you qualify. In essence, the marginal tax rate is the percentage taken from your next dollar of taxable income above a pre-defined income threshold.

 

Income tax under Ike wasn't anywhere near 90% for the super-rich, and wouldn't be near 90 for Sanders. Marginal tax rate is the source of confusion.

 

You're an idiot. The reason the effective rate wasn't 90% was because the tax laws allowed tax shelters back in the day. If you introduce a 90% marginal rate on the top earners, you will see a massive sucking sound of capital leaving the US, because economic mobility is far easier now than it was 60 years ago. Look what happened to France when they thought it was a good idea to raise the marginal rate to 75%

[Who is Yuri?]

When you say 90% tax, I hear 90% on all income. A 90% marginal tax rate on the super-rich, isn't a flat 90% income tax, it's a 90% tax on each dollar they make above, say $1,000,000,000. You may already know that. I just wanted to clarify for any bright young dittoheads that might be in our audience.

[Magox]

General rule of thumb: If you don't have your facts correct, don't make absolute statements that are incorrect.

When you say 90% tax, I hear 90% on all income. A 90% marginal tax rate on the super-rich, isn't a flat 90% income tax, it's a 90% tax on each dollar they make above, say $1,000,000,000. You may already know that. I just wanted to clarify for any bright young dittoheads that might be in our audience.

 

No one said ALL income. That was your imaginary partisan parrot on your shoulder whispering sweet silent nothings.

 

Words matter.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Magox

[Who is Yuri?]

 

 

It is on income.

[Magox]

 

 

 

It is on income.

 

 

Exactly. It is on income.

[GG]

When you say 90% tax, I hear 90% on all income. A 90% marginal tax rate on the super-rich, isn't a flat 90% income tax, it's a 90% tax on each dollar they make above, say $1,000,000,000. You may already know that. I just wanted to clarify for any bright young dittoheads that might be in our audience.

 

It is on income, you blothead. Deductions are severely restricted as you rise up the income bracket, so the 90% becomes effective on virtually all adjusted gross income.

 

Learn the tax code, idiot.

[Who is Yuri?]

What? I was attempting to clarify your vague statement. The 90% figure comes from references made to Bernie and by Bernie about Eisenhower.

 

Are you having a laugh?

 

90% tax rate sounds extreme. Xtreme Fuzzy Math. Call it Income Tax, and surf through the confusion and havoc. Xtreme!

[Magox]

What? I was attempting to clarify your vague statement. The 90% figure comes from references made to Bernie and by Bernie about Eisenhower.

 

Are you having a laugh?

 

90% tax rate sounds extreme. Xtreme Fuzzy Math. Call it Income Tax, and surf through the confusion and havoc. Xtreme!

 

So you attempted to clarify my "vague" statement with an incorrect fact?

 

To be clear, the 90% figure you quote isn't tax on income.

 

 

Genius!!

[Who is Yuri?]

 

So you attempted to clarify my "vague" statement with an incorrect fact?

 

 

Genius!!

Gross yearly income. How do you like me now?

[Magox]

How do you like me now?

 

Not too much

[Bob in Mich]

example of 3 tax brackets ( a simplification )

income from .$0.01 - $100,000 is taxed at 30%

income from $100,000 - $200,000 is taxed at 60%

income greater than $200,000 is taxed at 90% (the marginal tax rate is 90%)

 

If income is less than $100,000, the effective tax rate is 30%

 

If income is $200,000, the first $100,000 would be taxed at 30% ($30,000). The income between $100k and $200k is taxed at 60% (so $60,000). Adding $30k and $60k we get $90k on $200k income, yielding an effective tax rate of 45%

 

If income is $300,000, the first $100k is taxed at 30% ($30,000), the second $100k is taxed at 60% ($60,000), and the dollars over $200k are taxed at 90% ($90,000). Adding 30 + 60 + 90 = $180,000 tax on $300,000 income, yielding an effective tax rate of 60%

[Alaska Darin]

What? I was attempting to clarify your vague statement. The 90% figure comes from references made to Bernie and by Bernie about Eisenhower.

 

Are you having a laugh?

 

90% tax rate sounds extreme. Xtreme Fuzzy Math. Call it Income Tax, and surf through the confusion and havoc. Xtreme!

The only one confused here is you. An above average tax rate is nothing short of criminal and will have far reaching repercussions that will be felt at the bottom of the food chain more than the top. Read a history book, liberals. Your Utopia is never going to happen.

[Tiberius]

Sanders said he was going to tax the heck out of hedge funds. I'm guessing most people don't know much about them and it sounds sort of evil wall street like, so it's safe to throw out there.